Search This Blog

May the Sexiest Candidates Win

I posted this yesterday, but for some reason it was gone by the time I got home yesterday evening. So here it is again, edited only slightly:

***********************************

WARNING: MOCK POLITICAL POSTING FOLLOWS. Please limit any comments to those of a relatively non-serious nature. I spend enough time on political blogs left and right and overhear more than enough political arguments on TV and the radio ... don't really want to deal with it here in the little blonde bloggy paradise I call "A Sort of Notebook." Thanks!

P.S. I welcome any and all comments in which you agree with me, particularly on the merits of Dick Cheney as described in the searingly on-target essay below.

***********************************

"Edwards looks boyish and sounds boyish. Vice President Cheney is no Schwarzenegger, but he reeks of gravitas and has a biography to back it up — secretary of defense, White House chief of staff, CEO of a major corporation. Moreover, he sounds authoritative. Cheney went over the top in suggesting that a Kerry presidency would mean more terrorism, but Edwards was not a compelling critic. Edwards's indignation appeared weak in a boyish man speaking an octave higher than Cheney. A deep voice is an indicator of high testosterone and thus of manly strength."

OK, am I the only female who thinks Dick Cheney is sexier than John Edwards? (The writer of the above quote is male.)

I don't care what anyone else thinks. I believe that Dick Cheney has the sweetest little grumpy-man smile ever. And he's more of my preferred strong-and-silent-authoritative-non-dancing type than Edwards (who, cute as he is, reminds me of a darlin' li'l yap dog).

Plus, I have a weakness for balding men.

Know what annoys me? How some people say that that Kerry picked Edwards as a running mate in order to appeal to women. Maybe he did. Whether or not it's true, it's kind of insulting. I think women have better taste than that. Even if I do get a silly-loopy, drool-inducing wide-open smile on my face whenever Mr. Edwards appears on the TV screen. He sure is adorable, isn't he. Sexy, even. But I won't vote for him just 'cause he's so precious. Besides, cute as he is, he doesn't even begin to compare to Dan (my husband, not Mr. Rather).

One more thing: Being irresistibly cute is not analogous to being irresistibly sexy. And even if he's both, Edwards simply cannot make up Kerry's weakness in both categories.

And we do want a sexy man in the White House, don't we, girls?

Perhaps we should take a poll. Perhaps not. I'll merely poll myself.

OK. On a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being "sexiest," Kerry scores a 1. I would score him lower, but negative numbers are not allowed in a 1-to-5 scale. Edwards gets a 3 (he loses a point for darlin' li'l yap-dogginess, and another point for his trial-lawyer-ness). That gives the Kerry-Edwards ticket an overall sex-appeal average of 2.

Now, Bush gets a 4 (he loses a point for his ugly debate expressions last week). He is strong and sensitive. He looks good on a ranch. He is secretly smart, despite what people say. They man simply has sex appeal. And Cheney, in my opinion, gets a 5. He isn't overly cute like Edwards, so he doesn't lose any points for cuteness. And he would get extra points for intelligence, but you can't get more than a 5 on a scale of 1 to 5. Overall, the Bush-Cheney ticket has a sex-appeal average of 4.5.

Clearly, at least according to my very scientific poll of myself, Bush-Cheney is more than twice as sexy as Kerry-Edwards.

So, to the women who want Men With Sex Appeal to lead the free world ... don't let Kerry and his choice of a darlin' li'l runnin' mate fool ya. You'd do better to vote for Dubya and Dick.

That's my political advice for today. (Of course, this advice would be different if Dan (my husband, not Mr. Rather) were a candidate ...)